After Dr. Tiller's Murder Where to for Abortion Rights?

Millions of people are deeply agonized and righteously outraged by murder of Dr. George Tiller, a man who provided life-saving and life-enhancing abortions for women even late into their pregnancies.

The day after Dr. Tiller was murdered I attended an emergency gathering at Union Square in New York City. Hundreds packed the park on just hours notice. Many who were just walking by joined in. A 45-year-old Black woman spoke defiantly about her three abortions, describing how she had been in no position to care for a child and expressing anger at those who say abortion is a sin. A 65-year-old Jewish woman shared memories of dangerous illegal back-alley abortions. Young people of all nationalities, male as well as female, stopped to listen and dozens stepped forward to hold posters of Dr. Tiller and the word “hero.”

Similar scenes continue to unfold around the country and give just a taste of the potential reservoir of support for abortion rights that has long been dormant.

To a very large degree, the future of abortion and of women's lives depend on whether this reservoir is called forward to fight for a radical cultural shift and the expansion of abortion rights, or whether they are left on the sidelines as abortion is chipped away at and women's lives are foreclosed.

One sure way to squander this tremendous reservoir is to direct people's attention towards further reliance on politicians and the repressive apparatus of the state. Yet, already calls are emerging for laws to further criminalize anti-abortion activism, to strengthen enforcement of existing laws, and to support “pro-choice” politicians.

First, while many of the actions of the anti-abortion movement do fit any objective definition of “terrorism” (targeting civilians for political aims), the whole “fight against terrorism” is really the means through which the government has carried out vicious repression. The Department of Homeland Security (DHS) has rounded up thousands of non-criminal immigrants. It not only abandoned, but unleashed violence against, people trapped in Hurricane Katrina. And it has spied on and set up people who protest the government. It was in the name of “fighting terrorism” that torture was legalized under Bush and is being covered up under Obama.

None of this can or should be strengthened or relied on to protect the rights of women. But, even if you were willing to ignore all this, the fact is relying on the state has never worked.

The anti-abortion movement has been able to work through the state to pass countless restrictions on abortion access (parental notification, mandatory waiting periods, etc.) and to bring seemingly unending legal suits against providers. Yet, the state has never consistently prevented or prosecuted those carrying out violence and terror against clinics and doctors.

This is not merely because the ruling structures of the U.S. (the courts, legislature, even the military command) have been packed with maniacally anti-abortion Christian fundamentalists. More fundamentally, those Christian fascists have been allowed and encouraged into power by the U.S. ruling class as a whole who sees the maintenance of patriarchy and tradition as essential to the country's stability and cohesion. This is all the more so – even under Obama – as the U.S. continues its highly unpopular wars and torture and is experiencing profound economic and demographic shifts driven by globalization.

The services that Dr. Tiller provided were not only essential for women's lives, they were also perfectly legal. Yet, Dr. Tiller became the victim not only of relentless harassment and violence, but also of ongoing legal persecution. Most recently, Dr. Tiller was bogged down in years of legal battle over 19 charges of alleged medical misconduct. That these charges were completely bogus and eventually dropped does not erase the emotional toll and huge financial burdens Dr. Tiller was forced to endure.

Meanwhile, blatant violations of the federal Freedom to Access Clinic Entrances law (FACE) at Dr. Tiller's clinic occurred almost daily by ant-abortion protesters. Yet the state rarely interfered. Dr. Susan Robinson, a colleague and friend of Dr. Tiller's, recounted on Democracy Now how Dr. Tiller had met with the city attorney about this double-standard: “I asked him about this...He did not say when it was, and he didn’t say who it was. But he said, 'And they said to me, we would rather be sued by George Tiller than by the anti-abortion people.'”

To get right down on the ground: the state allowed Scott Roeder to assassinate Dr. Tiller. Roeder was reported to the FBI for vandalizing a women's clinic twice just in the week before Dr. Tiller's murder. Yet, despite the clear violation of FACE, and despite the clear warning sign of potential greater violence, the FBI did nothing. Roeder remained free to kill.

The lesson to draw is NOT that there should be more reliance on law enforcement. It is that there needs instead to be a powerful mobilization of pro-choice people from below, relying on ourselves to reverse the whole culture and dynamic in this country.

We must revoke the cover of “moral legitimacy” of fascist thugs like Bill O'Reilly (who routinely called Tiller a “baby-killer”) and Randall Terry (who's Operation Rescue ran a Tiller Watch webpage) who set an atmosphere for this killing. And we must reverse the demobilization of pro-choice people who've been told to rely on ineffectual law enforcement and to seek “common ground” with religious fanatics.

We must re-seize the moral and ideological high ground, declare abortion on demand and without apology, and go on the political offensive out in the streets and once again to the clinics.

There can be no “common ground” with a movement that bombs clinics, kills doctors, and shames women. More fundamentally, there can be no “common ground” because, at its core, the question of abortion is entirely bound up with one's view of women. If you believe women should be equal to men and live full social lives, then it must be their decision – and theirs alone – whether and when to bear children. If you are driven by the biblical mandate that a woman's duty (as penance for some alleged “original sin”) is to obey men and to bear children, then you will be driven to restrict not only abortion but also birth control. It is no accident that there is not a single “pro-life” organization that upholds birth control. What “common ground” could possibly be found with that?!?

Everyone seems convinced these days that polarization is a bad thing. Not so. The current polarization is very, very bad. The one where anti-woman fascists are unleashed and allowed to claim the moral high ground and pro-choice people are relying on the mealy mouthed “common ground” of Obama is deadly and getting worse.

But a different polarization – one where people had to decide if they are for forcing women to bear children against their will or for women's full emancipation – would be very, very good.

I believe that when people get clear on the stakes they, in their great numbers, side with women. Even those who today feel conflicted or even negatively towards abortion can be won to change their views – if they are challenged.

I saw this at Notre Dame when Obama gave the commencement speech. While hundreds of fanatical Christian fascists protested, there was no organized presence of the pro-choice movement other than myself and a handful of other supporters of the Revolutionary Communist Party. This defensiveness of the pro-choice movement had its echoes in the students and community members who had come out on their own. At first, they hesitated to even admit they were pro-choice, opting instead to hold signs supporting Obama and the graduates or simply asking the anti-abortion fanatics to go away. When we unfurled our banner, “Abortion on Demand and Without Apology!” many kept their distance.

Then they interacted with both sides. The anti-abortion crowd scolded them that women should “keep their pants up” and actually lectured that the “last time women were allowed to have free will they ate the forbidden fruit” and got humanity kicked out of the “garden of eden.” Our side discussed how essential abortion is to women's full equality. As the day went on, the students and community members got more defiant and more and more joined us.

I am also a living example of how polarization on the right terms is tremendously clarifying and unleashing. I was 15 years old and living in a small city in Minnesota when the first abortion doctor was killed. Although I was pro-choice, I was still Christian and hanging out with the Young Life club. I sympathized with my friends who were “pro-life.” Mainly, I didn't think our differences mattered. Then I heard my friends empathizing with the man who had killed the doctor. “Not that I approve of violence,” they'd say, “But I can understand his motivation. He did stop babies from getting killed.” All of a sudden, I had to decide whether I could be passive as doctors were hunted and people I had thought were reasonable empathized with this.

I will always consider myself lucky that I ran into people who were clear unapologetic about abortion. They helped me understand scientifically why a fetus is a subordinate part of a woman's body, not a “child.” They helped me understand how the right to abortion is essential to women's liberation. And they gave me a positive way to express the outrage I was feeling. They had posted up signs calling on people to defend the last abortion clinic in North Dakota when it was under siege. I signed up. I learned a great deal. I have never been the same since.

Right now, millions who thought they didn't have to concern themselves with the “abortion wars” are being forced to tune in. What voices, what clarity, what challenge will they hear?

It is possible to discern already that relying on Obama and seeking “common ground” will lead only to further disaster. Relying on the state – its courts, its police, and its FBI – will only squander our potential power in mass resistance and strengthen a highly repressive apparatus that has never served women.

This is the moment to raise our voices for abortion on demand and without apology as an essential part of the full emancipation of women. It is time to draw forward the reservoir to fight for the world we want to live in.

Sunsara Taylor writes for Revolution Newspaper (http://revcom.us/) and sits on the Advisory Board of World Can't Wait (http://worldcantwait.org/).

On Dr. Tiller's Death: “Common Ground” Is a Deadly Illusion; Abortion On Demand and Without Apology!

The killing of Dr. George Tiller, the courageous abortion provider from Kansas, has thrown down a moral and a practical challenge to every human being in this country.

History has been punctuated. The future will pivot one way or the other depending on what we do.

Either this killing will succeed in creating a climate where abortion providers cannot do their work and no one else joins them in that work, or it will be answered by growing numbers of people waking up, coming off the sidelines, defending our doctors and our clinics, and reversing the whole dynamic that has led to this situation where not only abortion, but birth control too, is imperiled.

Between these two possibilities, there really is no lasting neutral “middle ground.”

Two weeks ago, Notre Dame became a flash point in the struggle for women's right to abortion when Obama was invited to give the graduation commencement address. It provides a concentrated expression of why we keep losing ground and losing clinics and losing doctors and losing hearts and minds, especially of young people who have grown up in a time of complete moral confusion around abortion. And, in many ways, the events surrounding Obama's Notre Dame appearance set the stage for this most recent killing.

When anti-abortion leaders learned of Obama's invitation to Notre Dame, they put their movement on an emergency footing. They crowed about how Obama is the most “radical pro-choice” president ever. Christian fascist lunatic women-haters like Randall Terry (who is all over the media now exclaiming he has no sympathy for Dr. Tiller and calling him a “mass murderer”) were joined by zombie-like fundamentalist foot-soldiers to descend on the campus. They screamed bloody murder, trespassed and got arrested, projected their rhetoric all over the national media, and incited their fanatical base across the country.

On the other side, there were no pro-choice organizations. That's right, zero. It seems that, just like under the Clinton years when abortion access was dramatically restricted, the pro-choice movement was asleep at the wheel because a “pro-choice” Democrat is in the White House.

I went to Notre Dame together with a half dozen other supporters of the Revolutionary Communist Party. Several handfuls of students and community members who came out on their own joined us in raising a banner, “Abortion on Demand and Without Apology!” and signs that read, “Women Are Not Incubators! Fetuses Are Not Babies! Abortion Is Not Murder!”

Meanwhile, Obama was inside the graduation hall pumping out the deadly illusion of “common ground.” He suggested that every woman feels morally heart-wrenched by abortion. He suggested that we find “common ground” in reducing the number of abortions and the number of unintended pregnancies. Obama said we should find “common ground” around the need to “care and support for women who do carry their child to term.”

As I analyzed more fully here (http://revcom.us/a/166/ST_on_Obama-en.html), Obama's speech gave more moral legitimacy and political initiative to the movement that wants to force women to bear children against their will.

There can be no “common ground” over reducing the number of abortions. At a time when 87% of counties do not have abortion access, when doctors are being hunted, and women have to run a gauntlet of obstacles (parental notification laws, mandatory waiting periods, the thousands of anti-abortion “pregnancy crises centers,” and financial and travel burdens), the tremendous need is to expand abortion access, not to reduce the number of abortions!

There can be no “common ground” on reducing unintended pregnancies. It would be truly wonderful if all young people received frank and scientific education about their bodies, their sexuality, and how to form healthy and mutually respectful emotional and physical relationships. It would be truly wonderful if birth control were widely and its use was popularized. However, this is not something that the “pro-life” movement will agree to. The same biblical scripture that drives them to insist women carry every pregnancy to term, also drives them to oppose birth control. There is not a single “pro-life” organization that supports birth control.

When it comes to abortion, there is only one moral question: will women have control over their own lives and reproduction, or will we be forced to breed against our will and subjugated to male patriarchal authority?

If we want to save the right to abortion, which is essential for women to be free, we must take on the notion that there anything wrong with abortion. We must not be be pacified by a president who calls himself “pro-choice” in one breath but refers to a fetus as a “child” in the next, thereby legitimating the view that “abortion is murder.” We must go out to the new generation that has never heard people speak positively about abortion and tell them the truth: abortion saves lives and enriches the lives of women who are able to choose it free from stigma, shame, coercion or obstacles.

We must seize back the moral high ground and yes, repolarize things. Everyone seems convinced these days that polarization is a bad thing. Not so. The current polarization is very, very bad. The one where anti-woman fascists are unleashed and allowed to claim the moral high ground and pro-choice people are relying on the mealy mouthed “common ground” of Obama is deadly and getting worse.

But a different polarization, one where people had to decide if they were for forcing women to bear children against their will or if they were for women's full emancipation, would be very good.

If people don't understand that they have to pick between women's subjugation or women's liberation, then we have to clarify that for them. The more people see this for what it really is, the more people will have the chance – which they don't have as long as pro-choice people fail to take the moral and political offensive – to stand on the side of women and of humanity as a whole.

I believe – and have seen in practice over and over again – that when people get clear on the stakes, they will in their great numbers side with women. Even those who today feel conflicted or even negatively towards abortion can be won to change their views – but only if we challenge them.

I am a living example of this. I was 15 years old and living in a small city in Minnesota when the first abortion doctor was killed. At the time I was Christian and hanging out with members of the Young Life club. Although I considered myself pro-choice and knew most of my friends were “pro-life,” I never really thought it mattered. Then I heard my friends empathizing with the man who had killed the doctor. “Not that I approve of violence,” they'd say, “But I can understand his motivation. He did stop babies from getting killed.” All of a sudden, I had to decide whether or not I could be passive as doctors were hunted and people sympathized with this.

This is what is going on in millions of minds right now – over dinner tables, in classrooms, and on late-night textfests between teenage friends.

For myself, I was lucky to run into people who were clear about abortion. They helped me understand scientifically why a fetus is a subordinate part of a woman's body, not a “child.” They gave me a positive way to express the outrage I was feeling. They had posted up signs calling on people to join them in defending the last abortion clinic in North Dakota when it was under siege by Christian fascists. I signed up. I learned a great deal. I have never been the same since.

Right now, people who thought they didn't have to concern themselves with the “abortion wars” are being forced to tune in. What voices, what clarity, what challenge will they hear?

We must raise our voices now to demand the full emancipation of women. That includes the right to abortion on demand and without apology. It is possible to discern already that relying on Obama and seeking “common ground” will lead only to further disaster. It is time for the people, ourselves, to stand up and fight for the world we want to live in.

Sunsara Taylor is a writer for Revolution Newspaper (http://revcom.us/) and sits on the Advisory Board of The World Can't Wait (http://worldcantwait.org/). She can be reached at: sunsarasworld@yahoo.com.

The Deadly Illusion of “Common Ground” on Abortion; Response to Obama’s speech at Notre Dame on Common ground and abortion

By Sunsara Taylor

In the weeks leading up to Barack Obama’s delivery of the commencement address at the University of Notre Dame, the national eye was drawn once again to the question of women’s right to abortion. Anti-abortion Catholics and Christian fundamentalists, many of whom have been at the heart of some of the most violent tactics against doctors, women and clinics, descended on the campus. They trespassed. They got arrested. They put up billboards. More than 70 bishops condemned Notre Dame’s decision.

However, on March 17, when graduation day finally arrived, Obama received a standing ovation upon entrance, a glowing introduction from the Catholic president of the university, and repeated cheers as he spoke.

In his speech, Obama called for “fair-minded words” on both sides of the abortion issue. He called on people to express their differences but not to demonize those who think differently than themselves. He called for “common ground” and pointed to where he felt this could be found, as well as some of the challenges he sees in achieving it.

To many, these were reasonable words. To many, the response to him by the overwhelming majority of the student body—together with a significant number of prominent Catholic figures—represents motion in a positive direction.

But, when Obama speaks of “common ground” on abortion, he is not standing on some neutral “middle ground”—he is accepting the terms of the anti-abortion movement and adapting aspects of a pro-choice position into that framework while gutting the heart of the abortion-rights position. In so doing, he is legitimizing and strengthening a viciously anti-woman program while both abandoning the much needed fight to expand access to abortion and birth control and giving up the moral and ideological basis on which the pro-choice position stands.

Much of what is wrong with Obama’s approach is concentrated in a few key sentences of Obama’s speech, where he speaks directly to the question of abortion:

“Maybe we won’t agree on abortion, but we can still agree that this is a heart-wrenching decision for any woman to make, with both moral and spiritual dimensions. So let’s work together to reduce the number of women seeking abortions by reducing unintended pregnancies, and making adoptions more available, and providing care and support for women who do carry their child to term.”

First, and very importantly, abortion is not a “heart-wrenching decision for any woman to make.” A great many women are not conflicted at all about their abortions. Many feel relief and even joy at having their lives and their futures more fully back in their control.

This is as it should be. The simple fact is that a fetus is not a baby, it is a subordinate part of a woman’s body. A woman has no moral obligation to carry a fetus to term simply because she gets pregnant. And a woman who chooses at whatever point and for whatever reason to terminate a pregnancy, should feel fine about doing so and should be able to.

When it comes to abortion, there really is only one moral question: Will women be free to determine their own lives, including whether and when they will bear children, or will women be subjugated to patriarchal male authority and forced to breed against their will?

By denying the experience of the many women who feel positively about their abortions, Obama is undermining the legitimacy of this response and reinforcing all the many voices in society that tell women they should feel heart-wrenched for terminating a pregnancy.

As for the fact that many women do feel conflicted or even deeply guilty about getting an abortion, this doesn’t prove that abortion is a morally complex issue any more than the fact that many women feel guilty or ashamed after being raped makes rape a morally complex issue.

To understand where these feelings of guilt come from, where they do exist, it is necessary to pull back the lens from the individual woman to see the larger culture and forces shaping their responses.

Women have been told—for centuries in every major religion and almost every culture—that the most meaningful thing they will ever do is bear children. Women are conditioned—and expected—to plan their lives around when they will have children, and, once they do, to evaluate every major decision from the framework of how it will affect their children. Women who do not subordinate their own dreams and aspirations to the raising of their children are openly considered selfish and routinely demonized.

On top of this, there have been decades of relentless ideological assault on abortion that has been orchestrated from the highest levels of government and power. Women have been told that they are “murderers” if they choose to abort—by Christian fundamentalists at the doors of women’s clinics across the country, by talking heads on the major media and by blockbuster movies and TV dramas that invariably portray abortion, at “best,” as a desperate and regrettable act. Women have been told there is something wrong with them if they don’t feel guilty.

All this conditions the guilt that women feel, where that is part of their experience. But none of this means that there is anything about abortion that women should feel guilty about.

From here, Obama moves forward, stating that “common ground” can be found by working “together to reduce the number of women seeking abortions” and to “reduce unintended pregnancies.”

But, as I wrote previously, “To talk today of reducing the number of abortions is to talk about strengthening the chains on women. The goal should NOT be to reduce the number of abortions. The goal should be to break down the barriers that still exist in every sphere of society to women’s full and equal participation as emancipated human beings. In this society, right now, that means there will be—and therefore should be—more abortions.

“This is because there are many, many women who want abortions who are unable to get them due to the tremendous legal, social and economic obstacles that have been put in their way. These obstacles include parental notification laws, mandatory waiting periods, anti-abortion fake clinics that disorient and delay women, the fact that 84% of counties have no abortion providers at all, and countless other cruel and humiliating restrictions.”

Right now, as you read, real women’s lives are being foreclosed and degraded due to lack of accessible abortion services.

As for reducing unintended pregnancies, it would be truly wonderful if all young people received frank and scientific education about their bodies, their sexuality, and how to form healthy and mutually respectful emotional and physical relationships. It would be truly wonderful if birth control were widely and easily available and its use was popularized. This would be the best and most effective way to reduce unintended pregnancies. However, this is not something that the forces behind the “pro-life” movement will agree to. The same biblical scripture that drives these forces to try to force women to carry every pregnancy to term, also drives them to oppose birth control. There is not a single “pro-life” organization that supports birth control.

At its core and from its inception the “pro-life” movement has been driven by the biblical mandate that women must leave it up to god to decide how many children they have. This mandate is rooted in the Christian mythology of “original sin” and its repercussions.

As the Bible tells it, “god” created man (Adam) first, and then made a woman (Eve) out of his rib. These two lived in innocent bliss in the “Garden of Eden” until a serpent tempted Eve and Eve tempted Adam to eat the “forbidden fruit.” For this “original sin,” Adam and Eve were cast out of paradise and ever since—so the myth goes—mankind has had an evil nature which has led to all the horrors humankind has inflicted on each other ever since.

Flowing from this—and central to the “right-to-life” movement—a special additional curse is put on women. Right there, in Genesis, the “Lord” is quoted as saying to women, “I will greatly increase your pains in childbearing; with pain you will give birth to children. Your desire will be for your husband, and he will rule over you.” Later, the Bible articulates that women can only redeem themselves by submitting to men and bearing children: “For Adam was formed first, then Eve; and Adam was not deceived, but the woman was deceived and became a transgressor. Yet she will be saved through childbearing, providing they continue in faith and love and holiness, with modesty.” (1 Timothy 2: 13-15)

There can be no “common ground” with this view, even in the aim of preventing unwanted pregnancies. And, by seeking to find “common ground” here, Obama is just moving the ball further down the court towards enforced motherhood; he is leading pro-choice people away from the fight that needs to be waged for abortion while at the same time setting the stage for another losing battle around sex education and birth control.

What’s perhaps even more outrageous is the fact that Obama—rather than challenging the mandate embedded within the “original sin” mythology that women become obedient breeders—himself cites and legitimates this farcical and very harmful myth. Earlier in his speech, Obama offers a non-explanation as to why “common ground” is often hard to find between, among others, “the soldier and the lawyer” who “both love this country with equal passion, and yet reach very different conclusions on the specific steps needed to protect us from harm” and between “the gay activist and the evangelical pastor” who “both deplore the ravages of HIV/AIDS, but find themselves unable to bridge the cultural divide that might unite their efforts.” He says, “part of the problem, of course, lies in the imperfections of men—our selfishness, our pride, our stubbornness, our acquisitiveness, our insecurities, our egos; all the cruelties large and small that those of us in the Christian tradition understand to be rooted in original sin.”

No. “Common ground” is not hard to find because we demonize those who are fighting to subjugate women, those carrying out torture and war crimes against detainees, or those who want to deny fundamental rights to gay people. “Common ground” is not difficult to find because we have big egos or are too prideful or insecure.

“Common ground” is difficult to find because those who uphold women’s right to abortion are coming from a point of view that is completely antagonistic to those who are trying to take away this right. In the same way, those who condemn torture are coming from a view that is antagonistic to justifying, covering up and continuing that torture. And those who recognize the basic rights and humanity of gay people as well as the need for real education about safe sex are coming from a view that is completely antagonistic to the biblical motivation that sees any sex outside of procreation as an abomination.

As I stated earlier, there is no such thing as a “neutral middle ground” between antagonistic positions. Even the illusion of “common ground” can only be achieved when one side capitulates to the terms of the other side. This is exactly what Obama has done.

When it comes to abortion, the “common ground” Obama is putting forward is one where everyone accepts the notion that there is something morally wrong with abortion and where the legitimacy and the very existence of women who are perfectly okay with their abortions is erased. At a time when abortion is very hard to access for a great many women and the freedom to abort is undermined by the mountain of guilt and shame that is heaped on women for even considering this option, Obama’s “common ground” is one which abandons the fight for abortion access and retreats instead to a rear-guard battle to reduce unintended pregnancies without ever even mentioning birth control.

Finally, Obama tips his hat entirely to the anti-abortion position when he says we can unite to “provide care and support for women who do carry their child to term.” Here, in one phrase he accepts the unscientific, anti-abortion rhetoric that refers to fetuses as children. Flowing from this, a woman who chooses to terminate is killing her “child.”

In many ways, the approach Obama has taken to abortion—and what he mapped out in his speech—could prove even more dangerous to women’s rights and women’s lives than the religious fascists who were gathered at the gate. This is because Obama is dragging along many women and men who ought to know better—who, if there were outright attacks on the legality of abortion very well might be up in arms, but who are being lullabied to sleep by Obama’s calm and reasonable tone as he barters away women’s fundamental rights.

It is imperative that people see this speech, and Obama’s position overall, for what it truly is. It is not a reasonable middle ground, but a step-by-step waltz into a world with fewer and fewer rights for women and less and less ground to stand on to resist. It is urgent that people bring forward a new framework: one that values the lives of women above fetuses, one that sees the positive value in women being enabled to live full social lives including by controlling their own reproduction, one that recognizes that this is good for society as a whole.

On Abortion, Obama and Notre Dame: No “Common Ground” With Fascists and Women-Haters! Abortion on Demand and Without Apology!

When it comes to abortion, there is ONLY ONE moral question: Will women be fully emancipated human beings in control of their lives and reproduction OR will we be forced to submit to patriarchal male authority and to breed against our will?

A woman who cannot decide for herself, without any shame, judgment or restrictions, when and whether she chooses to have a child, has no more freedom than a slave.

The movement to forcibly deny women the right to abortion and to birth control is a movement to enslave women. With its aims, its methods, and its morality, there can be no compromise.

*****

Anyone who is confused about this need look no further than the gathering spectacle of theocrats, rabid woman-haters, hardcore Catholics and other assorted Christian fascists descending on Notre Dame this weekend. They are outraged that Barack Obama will be delivering the commencement address and receiving an honorary degree because Obama does not share their view that abortion should be criminalized.

For over a month these anti-abortion fanatics have been gathering. They flew a plane with gruesome photos of what they claimed were aborted fetuses above the school. They put up billboards shaming Notre Dame. Over 70 Catholic bishops have sent statements of condemnation. Alan Keyes, former Republican presidential candidate, got arrested protesting on Notre Dame campus. And anti-abortion activists will be busing out from Chicago to join protests on Sunday together with students who will be boycotting their own graduation.

It’s never been about
“a culture of life”

“Defending life” has never been the motivation of this movement. These are the folks who barricaded and bombed abortion clinics, stalked and killed doctors, and harassed, lied to, and shamed millions of women entering clinics across the country. They have passed hundreds of laws restricting women’s access to abortion and they have major backing from some of the highest levels of government. They never tire of reminding women and men that the Bible commands women to “submit yourself unto your own husbands as unto the Lord.” [Ephesians 5:22] And not a single “pro-life” organization supports the use of birth control.

As for the Catholic church, this truly is a relic from an era rightfully called the Dark Ages! Earlier this year, the Catholic church ex-communicated a 9-year-old girl in Brazil for the “sin” of getting an abortion when her doctors deemed her too small to safely carry her twin fetuses to term. The church also ex-communicated all her family members and medical professionals who helped her get the abortion. Oh, wait. There was one family member they didn’t ex-communicate: her stepfather, even though he is the one who raped and impregnated her in the first place. The argument of the church was quite plain, while rape is bad, abortion is much worse.

The deadly illusion of
“common ground”

What “common ground” can there be between Christian fascists—who have never given a damn about the sentimentalized “value” of fetal life, but have only ever been motivated by an arcane biblical mandate to forcibly subjugate women and reduce them to breeders—and those who insist that women are human beings capable and worthy of participating in every realm of society?!?!?!

In reality, when there are two completely antagonistic views, “common ground” can only exist if one side capitulates to the other. This is exactly the dynamic at play under in the “new era” of Obama around abortion and women’s basic rights. What is shaping up at Notre Dame this weekend, and in the Obama presidency overall, amounts to a two-sided attack on women. Women’s right to abortion is being openly assailed on the one side and compromised away on the other.

It seems that whether the matter is protecting torturers against prosecution or compromising away the fundamental rights of women, Barack Obama has made finding “common ground” with Nazi-like fascists his hallmark.

Obama’s “moderation” a
stealth attack on women

Despite the claim of the anti-abortion fanatics, Obama’s leading edge has never been to insist on full reproductive freedom for women.

Instead, Obama has repeatedly expressed his desire to move society beyond what he deems an unnecessary and polarizing debate. While maintaining the view that abortion should be legal, he has repeatedly conceded the moral high ground and political initiative to those who oppose abortion, stating himself that, “abortions are never a good thing.” He has increasingly accepted the terms that sever the question of abortion from the question of women’s freedom. For instance, recently, he made the point of distinguishing himself from those “who suggest that this [abortion] is simply an issue about women’s freedom and that there’s no other considerations.” And he has called abortion “a political wedge issue, the subject of a back-and-forth debate that has served only to divide us.”

But the question of abortion is not a “wedge issue,” it is a question of the subjugation or the freedom of half of humanity.

Yet, Obama’s top domestic policy director, Melody Barnes, is convening discussions between anti-abortion leaders and mainstream bourgeois feminists to find areas of “common ground” on abortion. So far, and unsurprisingly, the areas of “common ground” emanating from this group accepts the underlying assumption that abortion is morally undesirable. One of the areas of “common ground” so far emerging is to reduce the number of abortions.

The goal should not be to reduce abortions, but to liberate women

Let’s be very clear: To talk today of reducing the number of abortions is to talk about strengthening the chains on women. The goal should NOT be to reduce the number of abortions. The goal should be to break down the barriers that still exist in every sphere of society to women’s full and equal participation as emancipated human beings. In this society, right now, that means there will be—and therefore should be—more abortions.

This is because there are many, many women who want abortions who are unable to get them due to the tremendous legal, social and economic obstacles that have been put in their way. These obstacles include parental notification laws, mandatory waiting periods, anti-abortion fake clinics that disorient and delay women, the fact that 84% of counties in the U.S. have no abortion providers at all, and countless other cruel and humiliating restrictions.

Further, today there are altogether too many women who have babies because they are led to believe that this is the only way they will ever be loved or be seen as doing anything “positive.” This is a reflection of the class-divided, patriarchal society we live in; a society where women face discrimination and disrespect in the public spheres while being disproportionately burdened with child-rearing and housework, and where a whole cult has been built up around motherhood as if bearing a child is the most tremendous accomplishment any woman can achieve.

Bullshit. Women are human beings. We are capable of participating and contributing to all realms of society fully and equally with men. And when women—half of humanity—are held down and reduced to breeders, all of society is held back.

Changing all this and fully liberating women as part of emancipating humanity as a whole will ultimately require revolution. In a revolutionary society women will be unleashed to break down all the barriers to their full participation in every sphere of society. Women will find their worth in the same way men will, by the relations of mutual respect and equality they forge with others and by how they are able to contribute to society as a whole. And many, many women who wouldn’t even consider doing so today, will delay or defer altogether having a child of their own and society will be better for it. In a truly just world, society as a whole will collectively be responsible for the rearing of the next generation, not individual women in ways that curtail their own social existence.

We must resist

But even short of all this, and key to both building towards that revolution and key in resisting the onslaught against women’s lives today, is taking an uncompromising stand for women’s fundamental rights. Right now, there is a need for political resistance to every attack on women’s rights. There is a need for people to cast away illusions that Obama will do anything but compromise away the rights of women as he proceeds to carry out plunder against the people of the world. There is a need for voices of clarity and conscience who make clear that: Women are not incubators! Fetuses are not babies! Abortion is not murder!

Sunsara Taylor writes for Revolution newspaper (revcom.us) and will be on-site at Notre Dame this weekend covering developments. She can be contacted at sunsarasworld@yahoo.com.

Photos from Notre Dame

This is us -- Abortion On Demand and Without Apology, Abortion is Not Murder!

This is them -- what kind of fucking asshole misogynist thug do you have to be to compare abortion to rape?!?!? They also said abortion is worse than torture, worse than slavery, like the Nazi holocaust. These people have no morality.

Standing Up for Abortion in Notre Dame!!!

Live From Notre Dame -- Abortion on Demand and Without Apology

I got to Notre Dame yesterday to stand up for women's right to abortion. Here is our press release... and some photos from the scene thus far.

Women are not incubators! Fetuses are not babies! Abortion is not murder!

Revolutionary Communists on the scene at Notre Dame

Sunsara Taylor and other supporters of the Revolutionary Communist Party, USA are at Notre Dame this weekend to stand up for abortion rights as a key part of women's liberation. Carrying banners that read, “ABORTION ON DEMAND AND WITHOUT APOLOGY” and “Women Are Not Incubators! Fetuses Are Not Babies! Abortion Is Not Murder!” they bring a new voice into the fray that is shaping up around Barack Obama's invitation to give the commencement address.

“We are here to speak for millions of women whose fundamental right to abortion is being openly assailed by Christian fascists on the one side and compromised away by Barack Obama on the other. Women need abortion on demand and without apology in order to be free. And if women are not free, then no one is,” said Taylor, explaining why she had traveled to Notre Dame from New York City.

There is not a single “pro-life” organization that supports women's right to birth control. Almost all of them are rooted in Biblical literalism which commands women to bear children and submit to men.

Sunsara Taylor, opposes both the Christian fascist protesters and the conciliatory approach of Barack Obama, says, “Barack Obama has repeatedly stressed the need to find 'common ground' on abortion. But there can be no 'common ground' with fascists and women-haters.”

In contrast to Obama's insistence that abortion is a complex moral question, Sunsara is clear, “Around abortion, there is ONLY ONE moral question: Will women be free and able to control our own reproduction OR will we be forced to breed against our will? A woman who cannot decide for herself, when and whether she chooses to have a child, has no more freedom than a slave.”

Sunsara Taylor Debates Best Church of God

Best Church of God -- Debate with Sunsara Taylor from aemilia scott on Vimeo.

Sunsara Taylor Interviewed by Derrick Boazman

Interview with Sunsara Taylor on WAOK hosted by Derrick Boazman on "Too Much Truth." It is a two hour interview with lots of callers -- on the topic of Away With All Gods! Unchaining the Mind and Radically Changing the World by Bob Avakian.

Enjoy!


PART 1

http://podcast.waok.com/waok/1643415.MP3

PART 2

http://podcast.waok.com/waok/1643413.MP3

A Challenge to the Readers of Revolution

Last week, Revolution published a Declaration: For Women’s Liberation and the Emancipation of All Humanity. This is a breath-taking and sweeping piece.

http://revcom.us/a/158/Declaration-en.html

At a time when almost no standards exist in treating women like full and equal human beings even among progressive people, and at a time of miserably lowered sights and tremendous disorientation, this Declaration forcefully calls out the intolerability of the current deteriorating situation for women in every part of the world. It analyzes the source of this oppression and sets a new standard for all those concerned with the liberation of women and of humanity as a whole.

This Declaration has the potential to reshape the way a whole new generation of women—and men—understand the whole question of the position of women in society and the future possibilities. There is an ocean of untapped anger, potential to contribute, and impatience among millions and millions of women the world over. This Declaration has the potential to call it forward, temper and unleash it as a mighty force for revolution.

A CALL TO SPREAD THIS DECLARATION Get bundles of this Declaration and get it out all over—to high schools and college campuses, to all the women’s studies departments and women’s organizations, to the buses largely filled with women going to visit men in prison, to the women behind bars, to gatherings of progressive people, to the neighborhoods and beauty salons, to the malls where teenagers hang out and to concerts and movie lines. Take it to artists and musicians, to medical professionals and scientists, to writers and public opinion makers, to rape crisis centers and battered women’s shelters. Take it everywhere people are discussing and debating, and everywhere they should be discussing and debating the conditions of women. Spread it through email, on websites and chatrooms... help it go viral and change the terms in which people are thinking, talking, and acting. Talk to people, challenge them, stir things up. Especially where people are gathered to talk about the conditions of women—take this Declaration out to people. Study its line and SPEAK UP. Challenge people sharply to break out of the limits and confines of how this question is currently posed. Bring to them the need for the most radical revolution in the history of humanity and BRING PEOPLE INTO THIS REVOLUTIONARY MOVEMENT. Then, write in to Revolution and share with us your experience.

This Declaration can transform and strengthen the character of the revolutionary movement—from how fiercely and defiantly we fight the power, to how fully we unleash the fury of women in all we do, to how we ourselves think and even feel about the role of women in society and the relations between men and women. This Declaration can forge this movement into an even more powerful embodiment of the liberated future we are fighting to bring into being, and an even more powerful force of attraction to all those who yearn for a liberated world.

This Declaration is a tremendous breakthrough in communist theory and analysis of the origins of women’s oppression, the pathways (and obstacles) to liberation, and the understanding of what kind of future is possible and necessary for all of humanity to flourish. It is an expression of the breakthroughs Bob Avakian has made in developing a new synthesis on revolution and communism—and it is a form through which many can be introduced to his leadership and brought into this revolution as a whole.

In this Declaration, the Revolutionary Communist Party has developed a tremendous tool for transforming one of the most unnecessary and agonizing contradictions of all class societies—the subjugation and crippling of half of humanity—into one of the most powerful and dynamic factors of the communist revolution to get beyond all systems based on oppression and exploitation.

But, in order for that to be the case—this Declaration must be deeply studied, wrangled with, and taken out to people with substance, clarity and confidence. Ending the oppression of women will take more than tears and more than outrage. It will take a scientific understanding and a revolutionary solid core that is clear on where it is going.

It is worth it to step back further and really take in and appreciate the content—and the breakthroughs—that fill this Declaration.

This Declaration goes further than ever has been done before into the material roots of women’s oppression—digging deep into human history and into the ongoing development of the economic base of society—to reveal where this oppression comes from. Why it is not simply a matter of “human nature.” Or of the “attitudes of men.” Or of a “divine” or supernatural plan. This Declaration reveals how the earliest division of labor of human societies—a division of labor whereby, of necessity, women played a bigger role in childrearing—was transformed into an institutionalized relation of men oppressing women at the point in human history when society became divided into classes.

This Declaration is internationalist. It reveals how the oppression of women is integral to all reactionary social and economic systems, and how—very importantly—in this era of global capitalist imperialism it is the structures of global capitalism that have integrated in, reinforce and require not only the forms of oppression of women dominant in the “West” but also those which characterize the Third World countries they dominate and exploit.

This Declaration cuts through the crap of pitting different forms of women’s oppression against each other—where women in “democratic” “enlightened” countries like the U.S. are told there are no limits on what they can achieve (despite the constant and suffocating limits and dangers that surround them at every point) and that they should be grateful they are not in the countries where women are stoned to death. And, where fundamentalists of all varieties—from the Islamic fundamentalists growing in strength and influence throughout large parts of the world to the Christian fundamentalists who are every bit as misogynist and “medieval” right here in the U.S.—point to the degradation of pornography and sex trafficking to argue for and enforce their Dark Ages forms of patriarchal subjugation of women. From the burka to the thong—this Declaration cuts through the appearance of difference to the essence of women’s subjugation with materialism and science.

This Declaration goes deep into that “much cherished” institution of the family, getting to the roots of WHY it continues to be the most dangerous place for women and children. It ties together the origins of the family as a “household of slaves” to the way the family has evolved in capitalist societies. It reveals how marital relations are still fundamentally property relations and how this has everything to do with the double standard that deems women who have many sexual partners as “sluts” and men who have many sexual partners as “studs.” It even illuminates why men in this society feel entitled to venture outside their marriages for sexual gratification rather than striving for a more loving relationship and caring intimacy with their wives—and why so many women are forced into the material conditions and indoctrinated with the ideology of their “place” that makes them so available to be used and abused as sex objects by men.

This Declaration examines and makes sense out of the tremendously positive achievements of the Women’s Liberation movement of the 1960’s and early 70’s as well as the shortcomings. It draws the lessons essential for advancing today and dissects the difference between the bourgeois feminist movement and those who take up the struggle for women’s emancipation as part of the overall fight to transform the whole world.

Repeatedly throughout this document, it is revealed how capitalism has not and cannot achieve the liberation of women but only has transformed the ways in which women are oppressed. It reveals how the Christian fascist movement to reinforce patriarchy and the traditional family became an essential vehicle of the ruling class as a whole to reverse the tide on a whole number of wide advances that had been made by the radical and revolutionary movements of the 60’s and 70’s. And this Declaration shows how the poison of patriarchy and religion has been a vehicle through which the rulers have drawn many who are still bitterly oppressed and once dreamed of another world into their reactionary fold.

A PARTICULAR INVITATION From April 3 - 5 there will be a major conference at Hampshire College, “From Abortion Rights to Social Justice: Building the Movement for Reproductive Freedom.” Every year this conference draws many hundreds of progressive and radical minded students from around the country who are dedicated to women’s advance. There will be many in attendance and on the panels who have contributed significantly to the fight for women’s liberation. At the same time, this conference will be marked by the very limitations polemicized against in the Declaration. Everyone attending and organizing this conference needs to get this Declaration, be challenged with its content, and invited as well as challenged to relate to the revolutionary movement as the only way to liberate women and as a key part of emancipating all of humanity. I will be attending and am putting out the call to all the readers of Revolution to join me in attending this conference. This will be the chance to intersect in a concentrated way with women and progressive men on campuses from around the country as well as a concentration of forces in the current women’s movement. This is a strategically very important way of impacting the country as a whole, spreading this Declaration coast to coast, and laying a foundation for wrenching out a new revolutionary movement for the liberation of women among a new generation. If you are interested in attending as part of this revolutionary team, contact us through rcppubs@hotmail.com. Also, begin really wrangling with and getting experience taking out this Declaration. Use the editorial in this issue, “A Challenge to the Readers of Revolution” as a guide for getting further into the content and what is being called forward through this Declaration. Attending this will be an opportunity to really get trained in the revolutionary line of this Declaration and to spread it to a strategic and pivotal section of the population as a key part of hastening the development of and preparing politically to be able to seize on a revolutionary opportunity. — Sunsara Taylor, Correspondent for Revolution newspaper

This Declaration reveals how, because an actual revolution was not made during the upsurges of the ’60s, the advances made were not able to be maintained. At a time when disorientation has engulfed so many, this Declaration takes the time to remind us that an actual revolution means the overthrow of one class by another and the establishment of a new state—not merely a lot of upsurge and struggle and change of attitudes.

This Declaration gets into how central the question of women’s right to abortion and birth control is to the full emancipation of women—why attacks on these fundamental rights have been a leading edge of the reactionary assault of the rulers of this country and the Christian fascists they have unleashed. And this Declaration challenges and calls out the disorientation and defensiveness on the question of abortion that has taken hold in the official bourgeois feminist movement.

From here, this Declaration goes into four major roadblocks to emancipation. These are questions that not only plague people broadly, but even muddle and confuse those who are genuinely seeking to contribute something positive to humanity. It is revealed how these wrong views—championing U.S. imperialism as a force that can “liberate women,” failing to challenge the cult of motherhood, fighting for “strong families” among the oppressed, and “choosing” to be a sex object as an act of “empowerment”—not only fall short, but lead people AWAY from the liberation that is so urgently needed and possible.

Never before has the communist movement spoken with such materialism and scientific sharpness to the need to break with the ideology that sanctifies motherhood and childbirth, to break with any romanticism around the family, to really step out of being played by the lose/lose “choice” between U.S. imperialism and Islamic fundamentalism, and to get fully beyond viewing women as sex objects and commodifying sex itself. These polemics speak powerfully to people “where they live” and there is an urgent need for sharp and uncompromising ideological as well as political struggle around these questions.

At the same time, it is essential to grasp that these polemics rest on—and are as powerful as they are precisely because they are rooted in—the materialism of a full understanding of the dynamics of capitalism-imperialism and the way it puts its stamp of oppression, exploitation, and bourgeois right on everything from the way people’s lives are curtailed to the way that even their dreams and aspirations are shaped. What makes these polemics searing and irrefutable, what makes them able to be so damning while at the same time so “sensitive” and lofty is the fact that they are so deeply scientific.

In opposition to all the settling in to the world as it is and the wrong, but “settled” verdicts against communism and revolution, this Declaration powerfully makes the case that ONLY communist revolution can liberate women. It busts the lid off the imagination and vision of human potential—painting a powerful picture of what could be accomplished very quickly with state power in the hands of the revolutionary proletariat led by their vanguard party. This Declaration boldly and correctly declares that revolutionary state power is “a most liberating thing!” It challenges people to imagine a society without rape, without systematic brutality and degradation of women, with full access to birth control and abortion as well as the scientific understanding necessary to destigmatize these fundamental rights. To imagine a revolutionary society where women and men are relating in radically new ways and women are being fully unleashed as part of the overall revolutionary process. It paints a vision of a society that goes beyond any which has been brought forward before; one that views outbreaks of struggle against vestiges of women’s oppression as a positive factor to be welcomed, learned from and unleashed—even where it bumps into and “disrupts” other very pressing needs of the new society. It shows how this can be a positive factor in forging new ways to meet society’s pressing needs that are both an embodiment of the liberated communist world being fought for and a living advance towards that goal.

Nowhere else is there such a sweeping, uplifting, and radical vision of what humanity can achieve—and nowhere else is there a vision that is so thoroughly grounded in a scientific understanding of reality and the ways in which it can be transformed.

This Declaration sets the record straight on the tremendously positive achievements of previous communist revolutions, including on this crucial question of the liberation of women—digging in particular into what was accomplished in China with the leadership of Mao Tsetung.

And this Declaration goes even further—pointing to the lessons that have been drawn from that period, overwhelmingly positive as well as negative—and made part of a new synthesis on revolution and communism developed by Bob Avakian. As the Declaration states, “There has never been a stream of human thought or endeavor that has been more radical when it comes to the emancipation of women than that of communism; and never has communism been more far-seeing and radical and scientific than with its development through the leadership of Bob Avakian.” How this is so is gone into.

Tune in live Tuesday, March 17 to: Beneath the Surface,” with Michael Slate, on KPFK 90.7 FM Sunsara Taylor will be on live and taking calls about the RCP’s new Declaration: For Women’s Liberation and the Emancipation of All Humanity. 5:00 to 6:00 PM, Pacific Time on KPFK, 90.7 FM. NOT IN THE LA AREA? You can listen online at kpfk.org; click “listenlive.” In Santa Barbara, tune in at 98.7 FM. Sunsara Taylor is available broadly for interviews and select speaking engagements. Direct inquiries to her via rcppubs@hotmail.com.

At least as important, this whole pathbreaking Declaration: For Women’s Liberation and the Emancipation of All Humanity is itself an expression of the breakthroughs Bob Avakian has made: in its historical sweep, its materialist dialectics, its thoroughly scientific approach, in its appreciation of the ways that not only people’s options—but even their desires and aspirations—get shaped by the class society in which they live, in its confidence in the people to come forward as emancipators of humanity, in its willingness to challenge people “where they live,” in its putting forth of a new standard and communist morality, and in its vision of a realizable and desirable future worth fighting to bring into being.

Never in history has such a radical, liberatory, and scientific document been produced on the oppression of women and the means through which that oppression can be abolished, as well as how this relates to and is bound up with the emancipation of all humanity.

Anyone and everyone who is serious about ending the oppression and degradation of half of humanity—and anyone and everyone who dreams of another world needs to take the time to seriously study and wrangle with what is in this document.

This Declaration: For the Liberation of Women and the Emancipation of All Humanity needs to mark a new day in the revolutionary movement. All of us—whether we’ve been in this struggle for decades or whether we are just now coming into political life—need to struggle to grasp deeply and on that foundation live up to the challenge and call forward the revolutionary movement articulated in this pathbreaking, breath-taking DECLARATION: FOR THE LIBERATION OF WOMEN AND THE EMANCIPATION OF ALL HUMANITY.